Business Law Practice

.docx

School

University of Technology, Jamaica**We aren't endorsed by this school

Course

LAW 2001

Subject

Law

Date

Dec 19, 2024

Pages

Uploaded by MagistrateAtom9124

IssuesWas there a valid offer by Alex to Betty?Was there a valid offer by Alex to Cecil?Was there a valid acceptance by Betty?Was there a valid acceptance by Cecil?Was the offer terminated?PrinciplesA contract is a legally binding agreement between two or more individuals or groups, who has an intention to do business. An offer is clearly stated terms by an offeror who is prepared to do business with an offeree. For an offer to be valid there must be clearly stated and defined terms, as seen in the court case of GUNTHING V LYNN, where the defendant madea statement saying if he bought a horse from the plaintiff (Gunthing) and it was “lucky” he would pay an additional 5 pounds or buy another horse. The courts decision about this case was that the term “lucky” was too vague and the terms weren’t clearly stated, thus there was not a valid offer. Another principle of a valid offer is that there must be an intention to do business as seen in the case Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball Company Ltd, this case history starts out with Carbolic Smokeball Company Ltd posting an advertisement in the newspaper stating that if you used their product, you would not catch the influenza virus that was spreading around. They also made mention to say if you use their product as instructed and still catch the virus you would be rewarded and to back their claim they deposit some cash at a local bank. Carlill saw the advertisement and used the product as instructed however she still caught the virus, and she wanted to claim her reward though Carbolic claim they never entered a contract. The courts decision was that Carbolic Smokeball made an offer to the

public which Carlill accepted, she used the product as instructed and still caught the virus thus she is entitled to her reward. There was a valid offer as Carbolic had an intention to do business when he made a deposit to the bank towards the reward. A counteroffer is not a validoffer as it cancels the original offer, as a result, an offer can be terminated by refusal. As seen in the court case Hyde v Wrench, Wrench offered to sell his farm to Hyde. He offered to sell him for 1200 pounds, but Hyde declined. Wrench wrote to Hyde once again with an offer of 1000 pounds for the farm, but Hyde refused once more an offered 950 pounds instead for the farm in which Wrench declined. Hyde then agreed to the 1000 pounds, but Wrench still refused to sell his farm. The court decision was that there was not a breach of contract as Hyde claimed. The court says there was not a binding agreement due to a counteroffer that was made by Hyde. An offer can be terminated by lapse of time as Ramsgate Hotel v Montefiore, Montefiore wanted to purchase shares in the complainant’s hotel, he placed his offer to Ramsgate Hotel and paid his deposit to the bank in June. After 6 months of not getting any feedback from the Ramsgate Hotel he received an acceptance letter, by this time the value of the shares already went down, and Montefiore was no longer interested and withdrew his offer. Courts decision says 6 months was a reasonable time for automatic expiration of the offer thus a termination by lapse of time was acceptable. An acceptance is defined as an agreement to be binded by all the terms of the offer. For an acceptance to be valid it must be exactly on the same terms of the offer, as seen in the case Hyde v Wrenchthat was previously mentioned, a counteroffer by Hyde cancels the original offer by Wrench, therefore terminating the offer and making no valid acceptance. ApplicationThere was a valid offer between Alex and Betty, similarly a valid offer between Alex and Cecil as the terms were clearly stated and there was an intention to do business in both offers to Betty and Cecil. There was a counteroffer on Monday morning by Betty to Alex with an offer of $8000 cancelling the original offer, therefore terminating the offer by Alex, as a resultthere was not a valid acceptance. Cecil on the other hand made a request and not an acceptance based on the fax message that she sent to Alex. In addition to her handing a letter of acceptance to Alex on Monday at 7pm it was too late, and the offer would have been terminated by lapse of time as Alex expressed in his offer to accept by Monday at 5pm. ConclusionIn conclusion there was a valid offer between Alex v Betty and Alex v Cecil. There was a counteroffer by Betty therefore the offer between Alex v Betty was terminated and there was not a valid acceptance. There was not a valid acceptance by Cecil as the offer was terminated by lapse of time. In addition, her initial feedback was a request and not a valid acceptance. Alex refusing to sell his furniture to Betty and Cecil was not a breach of contract.